SJG

Meaning, without certif and S. Ct. review, Ninth Cir opinions are only binding in Ninth Cir.

The problem with Duncan is I do not see the U.S. Supreme's granting cert whichever way it goes and any opinion will only be binding in the Ninth Circuit. We would have to gain at least two new pro-gun Justices at a minimum before the case completes its path through the court system. Plan for the worst, hope for the best. On a better note, maybe any of the coming Trump gun bills-bump stock, school security etc., can be packaged with national reciprocity.

Trump thinks he can do a lot of things. Unfortunately, that doesn't make it so. The odds are against a change in the total composition of the court. Dream on--

The die is cast. Ths U. S. Supremes don't want and are not going to hear more gun cases, leaving the issue to Congress and the States

Many states have enacted so-called "red flag" laws (also under consideration in FL presently) which permit law enforcement( assuming they act on a report/tip) to investigate and in the event the individual who is the subject of the "red flag" is a gun owner, the State in a hearing before a judge (if contested) can seek a court order to seize any firearms owned by the person who is being red flagged until such time as the person is no longer a threat. There are variations on the burden of proof where restoration of the firearms is sought. Do you think these laws are a good idea?

Yesterday, I was 7 miles away from the site of the school shooting in Fl. In fact I was at a local range I frequent. The focus in the local media here is on the mental health of the shooter. I may have missed it, but I did not see in any of the N.J. anti proposed gun bills anything about mental health. Was there anything? The perps of the vast majority of the school shootings had severe mental health issues. Christy correctly referenced it several times when he vetoed gun legislation passed by the Dems. As expected, Murphy is using this incident as support for his agenda. Has he ever focused on the mental health issue?

You are getting a lot of wrong advice by some. 1. Firstly ADHD is treated as a disease and is identified in the DSM-5 Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) 314 .0X (F 9 0. X ) with its own diagnostic code 2. Your doctor is not trying to rip you off, but is justifiably concerned about liability and wants to make sure before certifying you as mentally fit to receive a new FID. The mental status of an individual can change over a short period of time. 3 You are absolutely doing the right thing by making full disclosure, as you disclosed it before in a prior application and there is a track record of psyc visits and scripts for meds. 4. Physicians do not like to and it may be a deviation from the standard of care to give too many refills for any psyc related meds even if your symptoms are minimal and you are esentially in remission. 5 No attorney is going to take your matter for any fee that will resemble the additional $375 additional it will cost you. You are just going to have to suck that up. 6. If you otherwise have a good working relationship with this psyc and he knows you, you would be doing a disservice to yourself to adopt the advise of those here who have told you to change doctors and spend the $375 on ammo. 7. Your psyc may want to express a factual basis for his conclusion that you are fit and back it up by focusing not only on your track record with him but a specific session where the issue was analyzed and addressed.

I have both and like both, but I think I like the E a little bit better because the E breaks like glass. Would not want the E in CQB but only for precision, it breaks too easy for CQB or self-defense.

Very sad, but completely expected. You cannot win an argument with these people who have a definitive agenda. The best we can hope for is that they go so far overboard that court system will shut them down.

The wife took ours for obedience training, didn't work too well for the dog, but the wife is now a better listener

Try Primers & Powder, a local drive-through in Detroit

call the Dog Whisperer he will solve your problems

Nice to see. However, the reality is that the U.S. District Court must follow Drake, unless the U. S. Supreme Court hands down a game changing opinion on a similar case. If and when this goes up to the Third Circuit, unless we completely luck out with a great panel or an en banc court decides that Drake was decided incorrectly, they will not overturn Drake, just because a different CCA decided the issue the other way. At the time Drake was decided, the 7th Circuit, went the other way, and that did not matter. Of course, if we loose in the Third Circuit, cert can be sought in the U. S. Supreme Court. At a minimum we are looking at 2 more years and possibly as much as four years, unless the U.S. Supreme Court decides a similar case before. So, this is kind of a back to the drawing board lawsuit. It is rare for a CCA to overturn one of its own decisions, but hope springs eternal. Better than nothing happening. This is why I indicated earlier, that the recent appeal of a State Case that was discussed, needed to focus on Wren and was employing the wrong strategy.

NRA should spend millions plastering every available billboard, publication and N.J. oriented website with pictures and stories of CCW carriers who saved lives etc. They spent huge sums for Trump, now they need to spend it on us

Don't you list a USA physical address when you set up the account?

I disagree: physical defect that makes it impossible for applicant to safely handle firearm; addiction to drug or alcohol irrespective of criminal conviction; minority, unless a member of the armed services, renounced U.S. citizenship; dishonorable discharge from U. S. armed services; non resident alien legal or illegal entry into U. S., undef a domestic violence restraining order, which has not been vacated. Do you want the above carrying guns?

Just curious, any proof that any of the victims were shot with armor piercing ammo? That proof is not necessary for what they have charged him with but could make a big difference to the outcome of his criminal case.

Vortex VIP is the best. They stand behind there products and want happy customers.

This is the best advice, get your record first and then go from there.

If the Chief denies you, nothing prevents you asking for judicial review. You are going to get judicial review either way. However, I do agree, that the present system is a bad system all around. My point was simply Appellate Review is based on what the trial judge decided. There are other States with much better CCW permitting models where the police are not decision makers but only information suppliers to an authority that makes the decision subject to a judicial appeal. IMO " may issue" schemes are antiquated and do not comport with the Second Amendment unless and until it is recognized that an individual who want to carry for self defense automatically establishes justifiable need or good cause. This debate will range on until the U. S Supreme Court has the balls to grant cert and decide the issue regarding the scope of the Second Amendment outside the home. That of course might become unnecessary if true national reciprocity is ever passed and signed into law.

True, but from a legal standpoint, the Chiefs are a throw away. As the judge makes the final call

www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/005426559985AEE685258168004F376E/$file/16-7025-1685640.pdf

i read the brief in its entirety. The argument is that Heller says no to case by case determinations --the take away being that you cannot have case by case determinations under our permitting scheme. Also that justifiable need must be construed as meaning a lawful purpose-under Heller. Frankly, a much more simplistic and easier to follow argument could carry the day. I agree that may issue laws(justifiable need or good cause and the like) do not comport with the Second Amendment for reasons expressed in Wren: "impinges on core Second Amendment conduct " I think the better reasoning is not the one expressed in the Cheeseman appeal but rather is the one that we have been advancing that the N.J. Supreme Court has simply not yet ruled on. Switching horses (reasoning)-- that in my opinion is convoluted and weaker does little to increase the chances that we will prevail on appeal. Wren lays out a template that should be followed here.

If you can't write off your lease payments or have your employer voluntarily reduce your salary because the employer pays your lease payments as part of your compensation package, it makes no sense to lease